Demagogue Deserved Rebuke

Many Harvard students were disturbed that the Institute of Politics (IOP) invited Pat Buchanan because of his history as a hate-mongering demagogue. Although Buchanan sometimes also advocates legitimate positions, he must be ostracized because of the danger his racist rhetoric poses to our society.

The response to Buchanan (excluding the one or two questions implying that Buchanan is a bigot simply because his views differ from most Kennedy School students) was neither inappropriate nor restricted to liberals trying to silence a conservative speaking at Harvard. Buchanan must be vigorously confronted with his long record of racism at his every appearance to stop him from turning the hateful rhetoric on and off to suit his purposes. Confronting hate-mongers is not the sole province of the left, accepted wisdom in Cambridge notwithstanding. Buchanan's bigotry is not a figment in the imagination of liberals: His anti-Semitic ranting has been denounced by leading conservatives like William Buckley and Norman Podhoretz.

One cannot separate the messenger from the message. There is a duty to oppose racists, even if one agrees with many of their legitimate policy positions because of the danger they pose to our society. It is important to expose bigots instead of accepting them into the mainstream by focusing on their respectable advocacy. Giving demagogues a platform to speak about legitimate issues also enhances their ability to spread hate.

Sadly, Buchanan has not been relegated to the oblivion of the fringe, as demonstrated by the IOP's recent invitation, an honor it would not have extended to a David Duke. Harvard students therefore had a responsibility to demonstrate that they do not consider Buchanan an acceptable part of the political spectrum. Although Buchanan has usually been more circumspect in his incitement than the likes of Duke, his history as a demagogue is just as long and unambiguous. Buchanan has repeatedly used the rhetoric of patriotism and conservatism to spread the cause of bigotry. For example, Buchanan's opposition to the Gulf War was perfectly legitimate, if not puzzling for a supporter of a hard-line American foreign policy for so long. But his rhetoric--insinuating that American Jews blindly loyal to Israel were the main proponents of a war to be fought by an American military composed entirely of non-Jews--constituted nothing less than demagogic anti-Semitic incitement.

As Charles Krauthammer (not exactly a flaming liberal himself) wrote, "[Buchanan's] technique is to convey raw prejudice to his followers, who understand his code, than go on respectable media [and now to Harvard], smile and pretend he never meant it. His trademark is the wink. The wink is interpreted by his friends in mainstream media as 'I'm fooling the mob.' It is understood by the mob as 'I'm fooling the pointy-heads.'"

Indeed, even Buchanan's legendary oratorical skills (admittedly superior to that of his questioners) could not completely hide his dark side at the ARCO Forum on Thursday. Buchanan stood squarely behind his remarks in praise of Hitler, his crack that Holocaust survivors have "group fantasies of martyrdom" and his support of Nazi war criminal John Demjanjuk. As Neal Sher, the former director of the Justice Department's Office of Special Investigations said, "Buchanan went to bat for every Nazi war criminal in America."

The response by Harvard students could not have been an attempt to divert attention from Buchanan's conservative message because his address was devoid of conservative issues. Whatever its merits, campaign finance reform, with adherents and detractors amongst both left and right, is not a conservative cause. Buchanan's new alliance with Marxist and extremist of the left, Lenora Fullani, who accompanied him to the ARCO Forum, is not a sign of moderation but rather of the completion of his metamorphism into prejudice-preaching populist. The only thing missing was his usual demagogic attachment of Jewish-sounding names to the Washington and Wall Street establishments that he now says are ruining America.

I am not suggesting that Buchanan does not have the right to articulate his views, even the racist ones, only that the IOP should not have given him a soapbox. Once it did, the proper response--conservative or liberal--to the appearance of this Nazi sympathizer at Harvard was to question the invitation by confronting him with the hate-filled rhetoric Buchanan saves for audiences he thinks receptive to bigotry.

Buchanan wrote that, "George Bush should have told the NAACP convention that black America has grown up, that the NAACP should close up shop, that its members should go home and reflect on JFK's admonition: 'Ask not what your country can do for you, but rather ask what you can do for your country.'"

It is ironic that the Institute of Politics, dedicated to the remembrance of President Kennedy, saw fit to invite Pat Buchanan, a demagogic hate-monger who casts aspersions on the patriotism of whole groups of Americans, sometimes through the very words of Kennedy's most inspiring address.

Aharon J. Friedman is a student at Harvard Law School and the Kennedy School of Government.